Posted
by
samzenpus
on Monday March 04, 2013 @09:39AM
from the all-the-erasers-in-one-basket dept.

asjk writes "The controversial database includes millions of children and documents their names, addresses, disabilities other statistics and demographics. Federal law allows for the files to be shared with private companies. From the article: 'In operation just three months, the database already holds files on millions of children identified by name, address and sometimes social security number. Learning disabilities are documented, test scores recorded, attendance noted. In some cases, the database tracks student hobbies, career goals, attitudes toward school - even homework completion. Local education officials retain legal control over their students' information. But federal law allows them to share files in their portion of the database with private companies selling educational products and services."

You don't need to directly measure the variable (person's state: connection graph, behaviors, interests, etc); you may estimate the state of the variable by the observable information (how other's react, discuss, etc). This is the basis of sensor theory.

Facebook tracks information on persons with and without accounts based on information provided by other users. For those without accounts, Facebook creates "shadow profiles." [slashdot.org]

Possibly. Are you wishing 'happy birthday' to people you never talk to? I used to get those errant happy birthdays from about 5-10 idiots once a year on my myspace and 5-10 more on my facebook on some other random date. (Now, I just don't use those sites.)

Most people don't publish their real DOB or their SSN and learning disabilities on their FB page.

Do you even use Facebook? Pretty much everyone under forty or so uses their real DOB. So far as disabilities go, people practically brag about them routinely - when they aren't blaming every failure in their lives on them. (OK, these are self-diagnosed disabilities...)

Agreed, putting PHI (which is what disabilities should be classified as) into a database open to corporate fishing is just asking for problems. It's not like this data is going to ever go away, so it's likely these children will have their disability brought up during an interview 20 years from now (or not, they'll likely just be dropped into the round file as not worth interviewing). I can't believe that the US doesn't have some type of data privacy law beyond HIPAA, I wonder what type of incident it will take before people will wake up and demand that this kind of idiocy is shut down?

It would need to be something that affected large numbers of people in most states violently. Even that might not be enough. Some legislators would favor big companies (or even just companies) even if a majority of their voters had written in objecting. (I've got at least one Senator that I feel that describes.)

Unless they have an insanely awesome security team and very rigorous employee screening, this will not end well.

The smarter way to handle it would be to replace personal information with UIDs. School districts alone can map UIDs to actual students. It'd be relatively trivial to implement, on either side. Sure, if someone crouched the numbers hard enough, they might be able to use analysis to collate the data to individuals. But that'd be enough to keep random stalkers, pedos, abusive parent with a restraining order against them, etc at bay.

If I was the non-profit running the DB, I'd be strongly pushing for something like that to absolve me of the liability and risk. Less persistent threats if the data is only useful to the student, school and statistics folks. The data, especially anonymized, would be VERY useful for curriculum research and development.

What kind of country allows this kind of information to be tracked "en masse", much less sells it to private companies? It reminds me of the credit-rating agencies:P private companies that somehow are magically authorized to suck up all of your financial information and sell it. At least the US finally added the ability for you to "freeze" your credit data. That's the wrong way around - they ought to have to actively ask for permission, but it's better than nothing.

Now your kids need to be able to "freeze" their school data. Worse, the US is continually trying to force its lack of privacy on the rest of the world, most recently with FATCA.

It's a crying shame that the US Constitution forgot to list privacy as a basic right to be guaranteed by the government, right next to life and liberty. Failing that, you guys really need to get some privacy laws on the books!

One thing that's amazing to me about this... and continues to amaze me is the discrepancy between what private corporations are allowed to get away with and what researchers at nonprofit universities and organizations have to put up with to get something much smaller and more innocuous done.

For example, if this was a research project at a university, it would probably be dead in the water due to IRB ethical concerns about privacy, etc. In the very least, it would probably require opt-in from parents.

It's a crying shame that the US Constitution forgot to list privacy as a basic right to be guaranteed by the government, right next to life and liberty.

The Constitution doesn't say what government isn't allowed to do, it says what government is allowed to do. And I think anyone other than a lawyer would have a hard time finding authority in there for this kind of boondoggle.

But over the last few decades people have been happy to ignore the Constitution when they're getting things they want, and then act surprised when they're getting unconstitutional things they don't want.

You'll find that any right not enumerated in the Constitution is quietly trampled upon by anyone seeking authority. As such, that Amendment remains somewhat useless, as does the notion of a piece of paper being the source of our highest laws, without the use of force to back it up. Indeed, those laws are only backed up if those using force agree with the silly words written on those pieces of paper, and wish to enforce those laws as written. Prove me wrong.

All it looks like to me is a $100M SQL Server project for Microsoft, secured by the former CEO for his friends back at the home office.

Which is one of many reasons why the team-up between Gates and Buffet to create the largest charitable organization in the world (I believe it is an order of magnitude better funded than the second runner up) is a dangerous thing. Not just because it is a way to funnel money into Microsoft, but mainly because it puts so much control of so much charitable work into the hands of such a small group of people. Even if you like how Gates thinks, it still means that the blindspots of those people become blindsp

I'm confused on what this point has to do with the student. I never liked school growing up, I didn't like my teachers and I didn't like doing homework, yet I just graduated with my SECOND engineering degree. I'm pointing this out because what is going to happen from this database is private company's will see that Billy doesn't like going to school and assume incorrectly that Billy wont be a good employee when he grows up.

This database is effectively a big profiling system that is designed to trap kids who don't feel that achieving is the most important thing in the world. How a kid feels about school really doesn't place any bearing on how they do in life overall, a kid that hates school can become an engineer well kids that love school end up drug addicts ( The "school lovers" I knew ). This database will not help kids in the long run, it will be used as a tool to track, record and hinder kids into adult hood, all because this database will track what Billy thinks of school and his teachers.

If a high school graduate is being hired for his or her first job and did not work, then yes, the high school record may be checked. And yes, if the student has not worked, has not learned to get to school on time and complete tasks, then it is a reasonable assumption that this kid would be a worse employee that someone who did manage to wake up every morning, get to work, and do a reasonable amount of work.

Some will say that such a student will magically learn these skills when they are paid to so do, b

This database is effectively a big profiling system that is designed to trap kids who don't feel that achieving is the most important thing in the world. How a kid feels about school really doesn't place any bearing on how they do in life overall, a kid that hates school can become an engineer well kids that love school end up drug addicts ( The "school lovers" I knew ).

And a lot of kids and teens have huge swings growing up because they spent so much time living up to someone else's expectations and aspirations, particularly their parents or peers. Grades, sports, career, partying, whatever and the longer it goes on the harder the pendulum swings. You're really a B pupil but your parents won't take less than an A pupil so you're forced to study, study, study until you burn out and drop to a D student. Or maybe more relevant to Slashdot, the other kids hate nerds and so yo

I don't recall seeing "the need to meddle" in Maslow's hierarchy, but I've met too many people over the years who seem to have it; this DB and the tools who'll make the tools to manipulate (whoops, meant 'facilitate', right?) "the educational experience" will be for them a luxurious playground in which to mess people about.

I understand the reasoning that one can't judge the effectiveness of a system, and cannot improve that effectiveness, without measurement. So, what is measured, how, by whom?

There's no longer such a thing as a childhood. Anything you do or say practically from birth will be recorded and used against you. Have a bad year in grade school and some one will bring it up in your thirties when you apply for a job. A childhood prank and suddenly you are seen as a risky hire. It's already happening with social media as others are pointing out but imagine your whole school record available to employers and credit agencies? Even your criminal record is sealed when you turn 18 for a reason. One childhood mistake shouldn't ruin a life but they seem to have found a way. Perfect people will succeed, the rich as well since money can hide many sins, but the rest of us need to start worrying.

On its face, the proposal to share student data with private companies seems to clearly violate FERPA [ed.gov], the federal law covering privacy of educational data. According to the article linked, the schools are claiming that it's OK, because when FERPA says it's OK for student data to be accessed by "School officials with legitimate educational interest", that really also means third-party contractors working for the schools. Apparently, the Department of Education has signed off on this. WTF? How can this possibly fit the legislative intent? It says "school officials", not "school vendors" or "school contractors". And there's a reason for that: actual school officials are subject to some level of public control and accountability, while private contractors are not.

This plan should be challenged in court as a violation of federal law.

I'm also a bit conflicted on the security aspect of the matter, what would any non-pedo's motive be for stealing / compromising this data? The only thing is it becomes a true permanent record in the sense that it can be easily retrieved 20 years down the line. But, another interesting aspect is, nobody that I know of that employees people actually looks

Digital medical records are great. You can visit any clinic or hospital that is wired up and they'll be able to access all your x-rays, notes, and prescriptions. Paper is fine though for people who've never moved and have a family doctor or something. I wouldn't be a fan if they sent parts of my record anywhere without my consent though.

From the linked Reuters article:> The database is a joint project of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which provided most of the> funding, the Carnegie Corporation of New York and school officials from several states. Amplify> Education, a division of Rupert Murdoch's News Corp, built the infrastructure over the past 18> months. When it was ready, the Gates Foundation turned the database over to a newly created> nonprofit, inBloom Inc, which will run it.

Whatever the situation is, it sure seems like a huge moral hazard for local school administrators. They have an ethical obligation to protect children's data, but they have a self-interest in successful careers, which can be judged by how much money they bring into the district.

My guess is that money and status trumps children's privacy, even among the people you'd presume "think of the children."

How can this be legal? The schools are sharing student records with an outside organization. It's also not supposed to be legal to share SSNs in this way. WTF is wrong with people, they think they can just do whatever they feel like.

Any time a person needs permission from the government for any activity, including homeschooling, and such permission is denied for whatever reason, it becomes effectively illegal to do that particular activity, including homeschooling. In Sweden and in other countries, permission is required from a government official. If this permission is denied, there is no appeal in many places. You can look at the article here:

If I had mod points you'd get one. Some parents prefer their children at work instead of at school. They want the quick buck now, and don't put much thought into their kids' future. Obligatory school attendance can help cut down on child labor.

Purposefully under educating children is abuse. You are making sure they will be unsuited to operate in society and stealing their future. How is that not abuse?

I think both are reasonable. Just because people (which is what the government is/represents) decide to restrict an activity does not mean that activity is illegal. Nor does it mean that it is not abuse to fail in the care of a child.

Driving is generally a legal activity, so is homeschooling as is concealed carry of a handgun. All three are regulated to some degree and society has decided you can lose the privilege of doing them under some circumstances.

How many teachers do you know that have taught even a single subject well? Many of my math teachers in public school held history, english or other liberal arts degrees. I never once had a science teacher with a degree in that field. Your false assumptions or teacher's superiority is baseless. Considering that most teachers teach straight from the book, frequently just reading it aloud, parental teaching, at a one on one level could easily be far more productive than the current 30:1 rates, even if the

So, because most teachers don't have a degree in the subject they are teaching (do you have statistics on that highly precise number?), you think a parent, who most likely hasn't seen a classroom in the last 10 years (at the very least) and hasn't read anything on the subject taught in 20 could do better?

I have had my share of bad teachers, but there were definitely a lot more good teachers than bad ones, and pretty much none that simply "read the textbooks" to me...

IME (yes, small sample size & all that), even a mediocre teacher that hasn't just checked out can do well teaching very small groups of kids that they can connect with. The main trouble with public school (any many private school) learning is that with large class sizes much time is wasted on discipline, etc. I do not homeschool, but I have (well educated) friends that do & can definitely see their perspective. One thing they do right is they do it as a small cooperative, about a dozen kids in se

In my high school there were only a few teachers that actually knew their subject matter and I could probably count them on a single hand. The rest basically were useless with a good number actually causing more harm than good with their incompetency. All of this was in the best school district in a state that at the time was one of the best states for education in the nation. The worst was the 9th grade science teacher who couldn't form a rational though and had some truly bizarre experiments that when pro

Face it homeschooling falls into two camps people who deeply want their kids to get the best education and the religious nutters who want to keep their kids ignorant. One is something no one care about the other is just child abuse.

Bigot: : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.

Your irrational hatred of religion places you comfortably withing this definition. Your grouping of those who are members of a religion as religious nutters shows that you are ignorant of religion.

Why do you claim it is ignorant or irrational? Does the Catholic Church then have a long history of tolerance, education, and enlightenment? Does commonly practiced Sharia law even allow women to attend school? Does the state of Tennessee teach creationism with evolution in science class because there is equal evidence for both?
There is nothing ignorant or irrational with recognizing religion's long-standing goal of keeping everybody in its dominion ignorant of the world around them.

If these people educate the kids, which is generally the opposite of what home schooling is about. Most of these people want to indoctrinate their children into some crazy religion. Why should that kind of child abuse be legal? Why should a child be denied the ability to even operate in society later?

Look at their question about religion.The biggest single reason people homeschool is that they are religious nutters. I have a friend who's wife quit working to homeschool, every time they bring it up they have to mention they are not religious nutters since that is the most common reason for that arrangement. The wife stays home only because her income was lower than his.

Look at their question about religion.
The biggest single reason people homeschool is that they are religious nutters. I have a friend who's wife quit working to homeschool, every time they bring it up they have to mention they are not religious nutters since that is the most common reason for that arrangement. The wife stays home only because her income was lower than his.

From your link

Q: What are the demographics of the typical homeschooler?
As I explain in the third of my Three Key Points About Homeschooling, describing the "typical homeschooler" is about as difficult as defining the "typical public schooler"--the range of demographics, philosophies, and practices make such a generalization practically impossible.

When offering evidence to support your description of a typical homeschooler, don't submit ones that include statements about how it is impossible to describe a "typical homeschooler".:)

2. Never met a normal home-schooled kid, but I'm sure there must be one out there. In my experience home-school parents are generally terrified of their kids hearing a perspective aside from what ever crazy {$religious | political} views the family has.

And how many have you met? My brother's kids were home schooled. It had nothing to do with religion and everything to do with disappointment with the public school system. These kids are totally normal. They're ahead of their peers in math. They are better read. They play musical instruments. They do Tawkwondo. One completed NaNoWriMo two years ago at the age of 14. I read it, not publishable, but still fairly impressive for a 14 year old.

3. I'd wager that public school is less indoctrinating then 99.5% of homeschooling.

The summary is more scare mongering.
The database is designed to be run by an non-profit and will give the school administrators a free service, may be pay in the future, where the administrators can enter the information of the their students. The original cost of this was done by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundatation.
The database can then produce reports for the school and be used for tracking the status of the student.
The thing about the federal law allowing it is fear mongering. Federal law does

I won't go and track down the links (There's a link somewhere to the famous HBR "Database of Ruin" article, and that has a number of good links).

However, when you have potential for profit and money, you have almost certain abuses.

When you have people (humans), administering these types of databases, you have certain (100%) abuses. There are a number of documented cases of cops abusing DMV and arrest report DBs for purposes of harassment, stalki

You missed a key point regarding the word "abuse". It all sounds legit until you ponder the security issues and how easy it could be to gain access to the database--even legitimately. e.g., I'm writing an app to tutor math students. In fact, I just spent 10 minutes creating an introduction to Algebra, so I'm legit, now please provide access to the database.

Real security has been a joke in my kids' school system. It is hardly fear-mongering to extrapolate what that means for the database described in the

We can't assume a company will be good just because it's non-profit. If access is "limited", how much will it cost to become unlimited? If it's limited, someone is limiting it, and everyone has a price. Don't kid yourself.

Governments are supposed to be non-profit, and look what has happened throughout world history.

When it comes to governments, or any institution that has unrestricted access to all of the information about a population, no amount of suspicion is too much.

OK, this is like saying "everyone who posts on/. are worthless pieces of shiat" just because of the few boneheads like yourself who make wild sweeping assertions based on too little data. This database is clearly a serious problem that needs to be handled much more carefully than it probably is, but I know and have worked with a lot of these "local school administrators" you think so little of and most of them are underpaid, overworked, and care deeply about the children in their care. Often they care mo

Yet there is always money for inflatable covered sports fields, to acquire the newest gadget, golden parachutes for failed administrators, excessive numbers of administrators and other non teaching staff, all expenses paid trips to go to conferences in other states, and all sorts of fringe benefits for superintendents. The best teacher I had in high school used a slide projector and chalk boards and that was in the '90s. If someone could explain to me how smart boards, teachers having iPads, teachers having

Not in the school district I live in. About a decade back they got levy approved for maintenance and building projects (never specified what was to be built beyond another elementary school which was needed) and shortly there after the inflatable structure over some sports fields appeared, and the track/football field was redone with nicer bleachers, a new high tech track surface, better lighting, new score boards, additional out building, etc. I don't have a problem with parents or students raising or spen

{shrug} depends on your definition of "win". For us, rampant drug use, chronic bullying, and overemphasis on sports at the expense of academics were all important reasons to homeschool our hatchlings. So from my point of view, this news is indeed *another* win.

Children don't have a choice of where they go to school. The parents send them. If your parents insisted you go to government funded school, would you want a database like that tracking your every move and broadcasting it to anyone and everyone? What if you had learning disabilities? Still no problem?

Children are affected by parental decisions outside of their control all the time. Parents should know well ahead of time that the consequence of taking a government job, or taking government benefits or entitlements, means an accountability to the taxpayer. Learning disabilities or no, the public has a right to the data generated by its financial largess.

Is it okay for government funded research to remain private? Is it okay for sex offenders to remain private?

There's a difference between able-bodied people living in generational welfare and children going to government funded schools. Our country was set up such that the states had a duty to provide education to the nation's children. I agree with the broader point you're making, but not this specific instance. Regardless of whatever the parents are up to, there should be no interference or surrender of rights by having a child attend one school versus another. This database doesn't get you any accountabilit

Interesting point - arguably already a reality, since the rich already can pay for additional privacy today:)

However, at the very least, this will make pause for the rich who would be political - that is to say, those rich who wish to be government employees, or take government largess, will have to give up their privacy. I'd even go so far as to assert that any private company that has a government contract must make the terms and performance of that contract public.